science now in understanding and a lot of is informed by the psychology research and so the science of the mobilization turnout has gotten much better it's still pretty vague and it's reinvesting in a lot of mobilization techniques because we have learned in the last decade how they work as we have two separate things you sort of know once you get somebody to implicate voting by the two per cent and now we have better targeting techniques to figure out who you talk to and about what what message or targeting but the big campaigns do targeting and analysis on the front end of the allows them to understand far more precise clean way for their turn of targets and they don't need to talk to until who the persuasion targets are and if you are narrowing your universe the people you're trying to persuade you can make your messages sharper. you can sort of focus or qualitative research and focus groups and polling and an experimental testing to get more closely to the question of what that, what is at 7%. so you are talking to 7% and then not messages that are speaking to a far broader size

campaign and one of the things, after they won the nomination built what they call the data science team and increasingly that sort of function is becoming a core function of the campaign. it used to be that there were lists for fundraising or voter list and you could buy them from vendors or consultants and now, you know, basically it's a core function of a modern campaign to have people especially on the voter side just crunching and processing data. >> host: if any of us were to go into the romney campaign are the obama campaign and we were to look around the headquarters how many people -- is there a lot of young staff? what does it look like? >> guest: chicago dozens of people doing voter data and date and fundraising data on line analytics and every state there are jobs that are data jobs, voter file managers targeting directors. the obama campaign while thousands of people around the country hundreds of them are directly interacting with data every day. >> host: do you think one of the parties, the republicans are the democrats, is more adept at using this technique or they'll sor

on them. we we have a far better science now in understanding what mate voted people to vote and a lot of it informed by behavioral psychological research. the science persuasion still pretty vague, and so i do think that there's been a sort of reinvesting in a lot of mobilization techniques in part because we have learned in the last decade how they work. you have the two separate thing. you know when you get to somebody what you can do by increase their likelihood of voting by 2% with i have better techniques to figure out who you talk to about what. i don't think about it necessarily as message or targets. good campaigns do targeting and analysis on the front thanked allows them to understand in a far more precise clean way for who are the turnout targets who they don't need to talk to until it's time to push them to vote and the persuasion targets. if you're narrowing the people you can presuede you can make the message sharper. you focus the groups in polling and exoormt tal testing to get more closely to the question whether it's 7%, if you're talking 7% who are persuadable and n

Excerpts 0 to 2 of about 3 results.